Lets hypothetically say you've never seen the communists fail....

[charlie cho]

Its based on the utopian idea. One of its major problems is to give fair outcomes to all individuals and to destroy social hierarchies, one of the ways is to destroy all signs of luxury, art, or wealth. Better if it was said "fair opportunity to all individuals", no? But communists arent really saying that, are they. 

Reading Gorky's, The Mother, I could totally see in the book how the characters' pursuit for a communist revolution was not out of spite. I wonder if i was a young man in that era, I could have totally done the same, not knowing other ideas and being a hot tempered person.

What intrigues me though is people like nietzsche and Dostoevsky were able to see from miles away there was something fishy about socialism. How tf did they see that? They havent seen socialism unfold yet to its utter fucked upness, but they were able predict the horrible effects of it! What geniuses!

Im curious how you guys think you would habe stood with socialism in the era? Do you think you would have been like Dostoevsky or like chairman Mao in his younger days fighting for communism against imperialism? What do you think Dostoevsky and Nietzsche had seen through communism that it had them predict such atrocities even before the destruction of socialism.

(Only read the following if you are interested)

I write about this because i have a girlfriend in China who i deem to be really similar to me: a normal human being. She aint crazy like me ;). She has her own ambitions of mainly being rich. She's quite smart, but not as smart as me ;). Shes funny quirky and cool unlike most individuals i see from where i live which is in korea. I meet korean guys girls american europeans here and they aint cool. Funny thing, however, she is totally for the ideals of communism. I continuously shit on China and she laughs it off like my capitalist ideals are a bunch for losers Lol. Like, its funny how she doesnt react to me shitting on China, but she just gives shit on America and Korea for not being like China. She then says China is the greatest country in the world. She tries to laugh it off like a joke but then proceeds to say to me that she does seriously believe China is the best. When i then shit on chairman Mao, she then (very unreactively) responds how i could think of Chairman Mao as such an evil person. Then i told her she is brainwashed. She laughs again. (At this point her laughter startles me because i expect chinese people to be defensive and reactive. I wonder if the propoganda has become so deep that it had become an identity!) Like me being reactive and being angry at how the chinese gov treats its people, but she treats me like im a little kid and tries to comfort me.

 

 

Edited June 11, 2021 by charlie cho

[DocWatts]

Just to preface this, I happen to find the work of both Nietzsche and Dostoyevsky endlessly fascinating and culturally important, but that said...

I'd be careful about putting either Dostoyevsky or Nietzsche up on a pedestal as some sort of Sage or Moral Authority, as both were in many ways products of thier era.

It's fair to say that both men were sycophants for 19th century oligarchic elites that were mistrustful of democracy. And both were also very far from being an embodiment of the philosophy which made up thier body of work.

Nietzsche in particular was someone who had disdain for the vast bulk of humanity, and saw ordinary people as useful mainly for the utility they could provide to Elites. Much of his body of work reads as a power fantasy from someone who has been disempowered in thier own life; which I suspect is why Nietzsche is popular among angsty teenagers and young adults.

And despite the moralizing of his fiction, Dostoyevsky was somewhat of a prick in real life, who used the proceeds from his books to pay off gambling debts he had accrued. After a mock execution for Left Wing activism in his youth, the trauma of this event sent Dostoyevsky down the road of simping for oligarchic power structures that would become so dysfunctional and incompetent that it would lay the seeds for its replacement by a brutal Totalitarian regime.

Gorky on the other hand was an extremely admirable figure, and had he remained the face of socialism in Russia I suspect the History of the Country would have been much more positive.

Edited June 11, 2021 by DocWatts

[bejapuskas]

Communism never ever existed in the world, perhaps in like small communities. The kind of soviet regimes still had this kind of system where some chosen ones can get rich by snitching rebeling people to the elites. (Who were elites precisely because the regime was not communist) Also, a political system cannot be communist and discriminatory at the same time, which all these regimes were. True communism would require more development and maturity from people, but undoubtedly there are people who would be able to live in a more just world with less discrimination.

[DocWatts]